The politics of monitoring and evaluation: Implications for evidence generation and use

Background: Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is not only a managerial tool and apolitical process, but it is also a political tool serving political objectives. In Western Uganda, government and non-governmental conservation organisations monitor and evaluate Community-Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) projects in protected areas (PAs) and adjacent communities. However, politics of M&E influences how performance evidence is generated and used. Objectives: This article explores the inevitable politics of M&E and their implications for evidence generation and use. Method: The research was conducted in Queen Elizabeth National Park, Lake Mburo National Park and the Rwenzori Mountains National Park in Western Uganda and neighbouring communities. It involved Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) and three non-governmental conservation organisations supporting CBNRM in PAs and neighboring communities in Western Uganda. A qualitative research approach was applied using ethnographic research strategy. Data were collected through in-depth and informal interviews of conservation organisations’ staff, local leaders and communities, document analysis and participant observation. Results: This study finds that M&E is aligned to generate performance evidence donors require, with little use locally. M&E politics determines the evidence generated, aligned to powerful interest and donor information needs. Political leaders demand participation in monitoring projects for political capital by demonstrating their commitment to electorate. Conclusion: Dealing with M&E politics requires acknowledging its positive and negative implications and leveraging existing opportunities to achieve M&E objectives. Contribution: This paper highlights how to deal with politics of M&E and underscores designing and conducting M&E as a technical and political process.